Hello & Welcome to our community. Is this your first visit? Register
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: George BUSH

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328

    Default George BUSH

    For all those who criticize the American president, George BUSH, please read the following article.
    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollV...ory?id=1421748

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    207

    Default

    All of this recent negativity about George Bush is mostly the result of liberals such as Howard Dean with their power struggle agenda.
    Their goal is to re-gain political power is the US at any cost.
    Just as Arnold Schwartznegger is being attacked by the liberals in California for allowing a convicted murderer to be executed last week.
    As far as I am concerned, any American that does not support the president during a time of war is a traitor.

    A man's mind, streched by a new idea, will never re-gain it's original dimension.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    692

    Default

    so, what?
    i can invade Uganda and have any government i want put in place & look a savior.
    Don't take my words...the French have been doing it in their former african colonies for decades (see Congo-Kinshasa, Tchad, Mauritania, Central African Republic etc ).
    Nothing different from the nazis ( on a side note, Petain who all consider a traitor was voted full powers by pre-war french parliament still in place, not some straw man government ala Najibullah ).
    Recently, an american president perjured in front of their parliament for some cooky oral sex affair...nothing happened...i even read comments along the lines of: Give him a break! he isn't lying about the vietnam war!
    Now another president lied about mass destruction weapons (the whole UN France-Russia-China VS USA contention was this: they said there [u]absolutely were these weapons. Others say they weren't. UN inspection etc proved nothing could be found ) and that was the ground to start a war...yet nothing happens...simpletons are just happy and never bother to inquire why do you still get dozens of daily terrorist acts and why it all hasn't stopped with Afghanistan's fall...no wait...Milosevic...no wait...
    or perhaps the answer is "rugheads themselves are...", at which point occupying oil- or opium- rich countries does no good but to the coded bank accounts of some crooks.

    Back in time, under Najibullah's USSR-ridden regime, women could wear skirts & go to school. I still remember the bitching from USSR's leaders claiming at the UN american-funded terrorism ( aka talibans etc ) was a disgrace, to which the USA responded for all they knew, talibans were "freedom fighters", not terrorists, and anyways Najbullah ( later hung high on a street if i'm not mistaken ) was a straw man of the "evil empire". These days, let's invade a country because evil talibans can't stand miniskirts, schools read only the Quran & porn-TV is banned...it's morally unjust.

    Back in the 60's, France & Italy were behind Mobutu in the Congo rebellion (where at some point you'd have 3 separate governments, Mobutu, Kasa-Bubu & another one ).
    The ideological cover was Congo should become Zaire (ala Sedar-Senghor ) & foster the value of in-bred negro-hood ( n?gritude in Sedar-Senghor ) outraged by european colonialism.
    Millions of lives got lost.
    A few years back, another rebellion in belgian Congo.
    About-face, now Congo is no longer "Zaire"...

    So it's about ethics, not fictitious, gratuitous philosophies to embellish acts of power & supremacy.
    Once proposed a "nazi UN charter", Hitler baffled the proposal under the honest pretense they wanted to be the boss, the hell with blowing smoke.

    After dismantling colonial empires (evil, racist, whatever ), now Doublejew reads Israeli vetted reports & dreams about building a new one...answer...a) you could keep those in existence in the 1940's and b) if those could no longer work, yours stands no better chances in 2005 and c) how many "rugheads" are there? A billion?

    I just shake my head in disbelief.
    About polls:
    we had two cases here when (based upon polls & partial scrutiny) idiots were partying the victory & helding press conferences, only for the final result to change (by 10%, not 0,x ).
    In the 1993 Quebec elections, polls stated PQ would win the elections; instead, liberals did.
    Some scholars claim polls are inherently flawed (EG people purposefully lie & the undecided are in much greater number ).



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    692

    Default

    quote:As far as I am concerned, any American that does not support the president during a time of war is a traitor.
    was that from "Delta force III " or " American Ninja IV "?

    and what is a perjuring or lying president?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Former President Clinton, various leftists, and the United Nations said the exact same

    things Bush said, the only difference was Bush ACTUALLY took action, INSTEAD of just TALKING

    about it.
    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of

    mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President

    Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to

    seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." -

    President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

    "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the

    risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons

    against us or our allies is the
    greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb. 18, 1998

    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." -

    Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb., 18, 1998

    "[WE]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S Constitution

    and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on

    suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its

    weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl

    Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

    -------------

    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction

    technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the

    weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

    "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and

    palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

    "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports

    indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to

    pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is

    doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that

    will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen.

    Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

    "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace

    and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is

    building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin

    (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

    "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout

    his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

    "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should

    assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

    "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass

    destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

    "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam

    Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since

    embarked on a crash course to
    build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate

    that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

    "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if

    necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of

    mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F.

    Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

    "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop

    nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also

    should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of

    weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct. 10, 2002

    "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN

    resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons,

    and any nuclear capacity.
    This he has refused to do" - Rep Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

    "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein

    has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery

    capability, and his nuclear program.
    He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.. It

    is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his

    capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear

    weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002

    "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and

    has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of

    weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

    "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator,

    leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so

    consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to

    his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction...So the

    threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry

    (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003




    A man's mind, streched by a new idea, will never re-gain it's original dimension.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    207

    Default

    quote:Originally posted by ham

    quote:As far as I am concerned, any American that does not support the president during a time of war is a traitor.
    was that from "Delta force III " or " American Ninja IV "?
    Well actually that quote was from me, a former US Marine.
    Since your only military experience consists of watching movies, I'm sure you don't understand.

    A man's mind, streched by a new idea, will never re-gain it's original dimension.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    692

    Default

    the only soldiers i can get Rambo quotes from are those in service.
    Some die for those quotes.
    Hint: Kenndy was having sleazy weekends while sending soldiers to die in Vietnam. Doublejew opted for national guard, yet thicked the "non wanting to volunteer overseas" box...very brave. Another chicken pleaded homosexual; a third said he wanted to become a priest, then dodged the seminary when the war ended.
    These days they are the pundits waging wars on the behalf of the country whose "patriotic" duty they dodged...funny.
    Are these the people who can call anyone"traitor"?
    Or are they the measure of bravery?
    At least Hitler & Mussolini had volunteered WWI.
    the rest it's all a movie we all watch through TV news.

    Then there must be a distinction between "can", " might " and "has".
    If i had a billion dollars i could easily develop bacteriological weapons or atomic weapons.
    Knowledge is common in this era.
    I would hire a few expat scientists and fund their research and bingo, you get screenplay for some Bond movie.
    Pakistan has A bombs; India has A bombs; Korea has A bombs...this proves even East Timor could have A bombs.

    The only problem with Irak is liars said they had to act now because Saddam was striking.
    As a matter of fact, UN inspections & else found nothing remotely similar to the "secret reports" only B&B knew about.
    Now are UN inspectors on Teheran's payroll?
    That is all the evidence there...

    Interesting enough, back then liars said Irak was paying huge amounts of money to kamikazes, thus invading Irak would deplete the propelling force behind fanatics blowing themselves up to grant $300.000 to their families ( yes, news here quoted fantastic amounts ).
    That card had already been played with Afghanistan fueling kamikazes with opium money...but they stood corrected & said "secret reports" indicted Saddam...good friend from the Iran war times.

    Now they are three times liars because there are more violent & frequent terrorist acts & bombs today than when Saddam was in power + Irak is on the verge of tribal warfare, just like Afghanistan...you can only have a soldier at every traffic light & hope it isn't his turn...same as russians did.

    Not to mention the funny lines of liars claiming they are on a mission on the behalf of "god" and "god" this & that...ah but the hallucinating freak was Hitler.
    Hint #2: Pakistan used to be the only democracy to have a premier with a period, besides Thatcher.
    Rebellion came and now you have a dictator like Mujarraf.
    Can you really tell the difference between him & Saddam?
    Mural art hailing the caudillo...summary executions...garrison state...end of elections...war with neighboring states... yet Delta Force is fine with that...has "god" anything to say?
    When planes where crashing, men in cahoots with god flew "over there", instead of leading the the counter-attack.
    Hitler never left Berlin because in his own words that would turn him into a coward whose orders deserved to be disregarded.

    Soldiers die. They are into the ENRON disaster but don't tell the courts because of privacy concerns...




  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Don't really know where you are going with this since you tend to jump all over the place with it.
    You know that you forgot to mention that Bush also lied about water on Mars.
    What exactly is your point? That George Bush is no better than Hitler or Mousillini? Or Saddan Huissen or OBL? Why don't you throw Stalin in there too?
    There is nothing going on in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else occupied by American soldiers that even remotely compares to some damn Rambo movie or Chuck Norris movie.
    War does not determine who is right. War determines who is left.

    A man's mind, streched by a new idea, will never re-gain it's original dimension.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    692

    Default

    well, let's end this nonsense.
    quote:You know that you forgot to mention that Bush also lied about water on Mars.
    yes, sure...they dodge conscription & let "patriots" like you take their place...bravo...cheers.
    Or are you saying they aren't conscription dodgers?
    What's wrong with Stalin?
    He was America's big WWII ally, wasn't he?
    Oh no!
    Another ally suddenly found guilty of horrible crimes!
    Sounds like the USA have problems selecting friends.

    quote:War does not determine who is right. War determines who is left.
    for a start, a billion "rugheads" who can black us out and have airplanes crash whenever they want...for a start...of course big brother had no clue while flooding us with muslims then waving the bible...how interesting...now big brother wants to wage war at the whole muslim world ( at least Irak, Afghanista, Iran, Syria & a few others ).

    quoteon't really know where you are going with this since you tend to jump all over the place with it.
    i have no idea, but sure no further than:

    quote:any American that does not support the president during a time of war is a traitor.
    When Italy invaded Albania, the "reason we told others " was to counter aggressive German politics and to take stress off France & the UK.
    As a plus, our king's wife was a gipsy princess from Yugoslavia.
    " The reason that sounded good " was the Italy had just conquered Abyssinia and our king had then become "emperor", thus Albania was another "annexed land".
    Well, for local populations it was only for the good, since they were under a caudillo (Zogu) turned from president to King via a golpe.
    The "real reason" was Mussolini's son in law & foreign policy minister count Ciano & other influent people had huuge financial interests in Albania, and king Zogu was an obstacle.
    Now i told you the 3 reasons...which one was the true propelling force behind that war?
    I'm going nowhere: just facts.


  10. #10

    Default

    I am a registered Republican, and say that because I do not not want to be confused with a liberal when I bash George Bush. First, Bush acts like a tryannt and a fool. Illegal wiretapping is a violation of our constitution and what he is doing is illegal. He does not have the right to wiretap anyone he wishes under the pretext of stopping terrorism. He chooses not to get a court order, which he can do secretly. He can only claim emergency reasons to wiretap for up to 30 days after he delared the emergency...9/11/2001. He believes he is above the law and can spy on anyone he wishes. He is a disgrace to the Constitution, which so many American have died fighting to defend. When asked about the lack of checks, he got upset acting like a tyrannt, and claimed the reporter was accusing him of being a tryannt. Apparently if you ask the president about checks and balances, you are accusing him of being a tyrannt. By the way he did not answer the question. His vice president Cheney, actually admires Nixon and the way he spied. He feels that the president's powers were eroded since Nixon. Wrong, they were not eroded, Nixon abused them, and Congress had to reel him in. It is sad that most Americans do not realize they are losing their freedoms as of yet, but of course they are the same ones that approved of the war in Iraq, but now dissaprove of. I do not approve the way the Democrats ran this country into the ground, but I also will not support a tyrannt and a fool who has a total disregard for the truth and the law.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2016 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Username Changing provided by Username Change (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com